Top Trump: A Poem

[MyNameIsTerry]

Scotland is part of the UK. The vote was for the UK to stay NOT Scotland.

What Scotland & NI are claiming is as bad as London, it's a silly argument. The UK is made up of many regions, then counties, then towns, cities & wards, etc. Scotland claiming they voted to stay is like a tiny ward of a few thousand people claiming the same.

There are many in Scotland who are annoyed at this "we voted to stay" stuff if you look around. There are many also complaining that the SNP are using this to gain momentum on another Scottish referendum when they want to stay with the UK.

That's NOT representative of "the Brits" at all. Just "some" of them.

Funny that abusive messages are now ok. Seems odd to me.

[swgrl09]

I honestly don't know what was inaccurate other than saying automatic vs semi-automatic. I'm sorry but you can say you respect my opinion but it does not come across the way you write your posts. I recognized in my post that the answer lies somewhere in the middle of our views. Terry asked a question and I did my best to answer from my own perspective. But if you feel the need to poke holes in it and make it seem like you "own an automatic weapon" go right ahead. It's talk like that which pushes away the possibility of compromise and I think reflects what is happening at the congressional level.

Anyway agree to disagree. This is an anxiety forum, not a politics forum.

[Phill2]

I honestly don't know what was inaccurate other than saying automatic vs semi-automatic. I'm sorry but you can say you respect my opinion but it does not come across the way you write your posts. I recognized in my post that the answer lies somewhere in the middle of our views. Terry asked a question and I did my best to answer from my own perspective. But if you feel the need to poke holes in it and make it seem like you "own an automatic weapon" go right ahead. It's talk like that which pushes away the possibility of compromise and I think reflects what is happening at the congressional level.

Anyway agree to disagree. This is an anxiety forum, not a politics forum.

From this side of the world it looks like Americans need guns to protect themselves from each other.
Do you REALLY think everyone would hand in the millions of guns in circulation over there if new laws were passed?

---------- Post added at 12:34 ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 ----------

In reply to your post
"No, but does that mean we do nothing at all?"
All it means is if you do outlaw guns there will just be a lot of illegal and unregistered guns that can't be traced just like here in Oz.

[MyNameIsTerry]

Scotland is part of the UK. The vote was for the UK to stay NOT Scotland.

What Scotland & NI are claiming is as bad as London, it's a silly argument. The UK is made up of many regions, then counties, then towns, cities & wards, etc. Scotland claiming they voted to stay is like a tiny ward of a few thousand people claiming the same.

There are many in Scotland who are annoyed at this "we voted to stay" stuff if you look around. There are many also complaining that the SNP are using this to gain momentum on another Scottish referendum when they want to stay with the UK.

That's NOT representative of "the Brits" at all. Just "some" of them.

Funny that abusive messages are now ok. Seems odd to me.

Trump made the mistake of not saying "the union" so some Scots were angry because they voted to stay. He made a classic mistake by saying "country".

If he had said 'well done Scotland, at least you stood your ground, you didn't win but stuck to your guns' - he would have received a load of nasty comments about how Scotland isn't in the EU. People from England, Wales and also from Scotland would have given him a piece of their mind.

So, how could he win?

We were expecting Obama to wish us all the best because we are allies and of all the nations, we expected the US to understand a need to escape a European super state since you guys did it yourself when you booted us out. There is nothing for Trump to gain over here by raising it but because we are so close to each other people are curious about the trade threats Obama made hence Trump & Hillary will both want to address it. This means some comment was going to be made and whatever any of them say, Trump, Obama or Hilary - they will lose because our countries are divided on this matter whether the overall majority in each country was Remain or Leave.

I don't know what it's like in the US but Twitter over here is for trolls and nasty people in the main to throw insults around, stir people up, instigate various abuse whether racial or sexist or anything else. I avoid these places as they are just for those who want to fight all day long. Decent people tend to find the disgusted behavious abhorrent so it's nothing to consider in a debate over any side, Trump, Hillary or Obama.

That's why I laugh at this. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

---------- Post added at 05:01 ---------- Previous post was at 04:41 ----------

The right votes down gun control repeatedly ... It goes back to the constitutional right to bare arms. Some believe that should not apply to automatic assault rifles, whereas others feel differently. I'm clearly on the left and think citizens do not need assault weapons, but others feel we need them for our own protection and that law abiding citizens should be allowed to have them. The answer lies somewhere in the middle of course.

But congress has been in this deadlock between the left and right for a long time. It comes across like stubborn children - on both sides! So for a while the majority party would not even allow votes on the issue of gun control changes. But then after the Orlando shooting some of congress decided enough is enough and tried to protest to force the vote. I actually supported their move because it's heart breaking seeing more and more people get shot every day here and nothing changes. It's not even up for discussion with some lawmakers.

So most recent was led by senators from my own state, where we had the elementary school shooting in 2012. So it's a tough and painful subject for us in Connecticut. The shooting was the town next to where I lived. And guess what? That shooter was an American and not Muslim. Neither was the guy who shot up Planned Parenthood.

I can understand why Obama doesn't have support overseas. And both sides do name call. I just think trump takes it to a new level with insulting women, Hispanic people, Islamic people, everybody.

Thanks. So, if I consider what you mean to be semi-automatic weapons rather than full auto (which seem banned whether in rifle, SMG or pistol form? Is that right?) then we have assault rifles, SMG's (is that right) and pistols again (is that right?).

So, assault rifles that are semi-auto need to go. I'll assume you mean SMG's too, if there are any. But does that include semi-auto pistols? I ask this because you consider yourself to the left of this debate but over here you would find yourself more to the right - because we don't believe there is a need for any pistols at all. Shotguns too.

We have shotguns but only double barrelled. This is because of the history or sport shooting and animal control (farming). To have one of these you need a licence and there are rules about how to keep them. I think they have to be locked away and ammo separated or stored together but not loaded (can't remember which). If you then used them in self defence you would be seriously struggling to avoid a manslaughter or even murder charge. They are not for self defence over here. The licencing is strict, involving the police I think.

We can more easily own small calibre rifles & pistols. Nothing of a semi or full-auto nature as far as I know. These again are for pest control (rats or rabbits for instance) but also for sport. So, things like a .22 I think. I can't remember what mm they go up to but nothing that could really harm a person other than in the eyes. These need a more easily obtained air gun licence.

We can also own crossbows but need a licence similar to an air gun.

We can own bows without licence. The same with knives.

Knives have been a big problem over here as they are frequently used in crime, especially gang crime. We've had a few amnesties over the years too. However, this is where we come unstuck because any one over the age of 18 can purchase them from shops. You can see many on Amazon. But there are some daft points to this such as a knife that conceals it's blade or springs into action isn't for sale e.g. switchblades or Ballisong knives (butterfly knives, think the airport scene in Big Trouble In Little China if you don't know what they are). The same applies to other things like ASP's (telescopic batons, not sure if your plain clothes police/agents use these), telescopic nunchaka, etc. We can own non telescopic equivalents though so you may be asking yourself what is the point of such a "half law"?

This is what many os us think about your gun control attempts. You don't need any guns for self defence. If they were gone, some of the kids having accidents would be saved. So, why are your politicians only aiming at semi-auto's? Do they not think a massacre can be achieved with pistols & pump action shotguns?

This seems based on reaction to massacres rather than confronting the reality of guns in the US. How many people are killed by pistols & shotguns each year? So, how would new gun control laws achieve anything? It's just responding to public outcry when something truly tragic happens.

When it comes to terrorism, gun control laws will achieve nothing. These people are well connected and can just get them the same way your criminals already do. So, it only stops the people who seem to flip or those that have serious mental health issues. But it won't stop it, only reduce the impact of how many they can kill. We still have these crimes over here with the occasional paranoid schizophrenic running amok with knives and they do kill people.

I can see an argument for doing it in stages because whilst the criminals have guns, the people want to defend themselves but unless you commit to complete removal in a similar way to us, you won't make this go away. That's why we tend not to buy what is going on with your politicians.

This amendment issue should be changed. We have old laws about shooting a Scotsman on the border which were replaced by major laws that cover crime. They existed at a time when we were probably shooting Scottish rebels with a bow & arrow, a musket or a flint lock rifle. So, why do you need the right to bare arms? Hasn't that time in your history passed?

---------- Post added at 05:05 ---------- Previous post was at 05:01 ----------

From this side of the world it looks like Americans need guns to protect themselves from each other.
Do you REALLY think everyone would hand in the millions of guns in circulation over there if new laws were passed?

---------- Post added at 12:34 ---------- Previous post was at 12:14 ----------

In reply to your post
"No, but does that mean we do nothing at all?"
All it means is if you do outlaw guns there will just be a lot of illegal and unregistered guns that can't be traced just like here in Oz.

We've had the same over here, Phill. Serious criminals will always get guns, we cant stop that just like we can't stop drugs coming in. But when it came to knives we had amnesties. If your knife had been later found to be used in a crime then you would be charged, so many probably didn't hand them in too. Then it's up to the police to slowly take them away as people are found in possession for whatever reason.

But if the US won't make the decision to try to stop their easy access, they will only ever have more problems. It may take them decades to reduce it all but that's better than everyone still complaining in 100 years?

Give them an amnesty based on incentive. 1 gun = a phone credit, 2 guns = a LCD tv, etc.

[Phill2]

They bought them back over here and a lot of people made a lot of money handing in non working guns for money and keeping the good stuff for themselves.

What's wrong with shooting a Scotsman at the border?

[MyNameIsTerry]

They bought them back over here and a lot of people made a lot of money handing in non working guns for money and keeping the good stuff for themselves.

What's wrong with shooting a Scotsman at the border?

With the knives I think our plods were hoping it would solve a lot of old crimes for them without them making the effort from the DNA they would pick up.

Being English, I'm ok there but Kimberley might kick my backside!

[Phill2]

We have a lot of stabbings over here as well as a lot of shootings.
Must be the cops shooting people cause no-one else can have guns.
Next step will be banning Stay Sharp kitchen knives.

[MyNameIsTerry]

There's an old joke about a mugging at knifepoint.

"The police believe the man was local as there was still butter on the knife!

[Phill2]

There's an old joke about a mugging at knifepoint.

"The police believe the man was local as there was still butter on the knife!

Can't argue with that one

[MyNameIsTerry]

We have a lot of stabbings over here as well as a lot of shootings.

Has chopper still not retired then?